Journalists operate at a lower level than average

[SOTTREADER]

This may be wrong but based on my experience of having to adapt yourself to a wider organism i.e. an organisation in order to make a living I think certain things could be driving this.

In the main, I think it is what is set by management or "the culture" of a place that then determines how the majority act. Imagine coming in as a fresh faced recruit, one of the first things you do is assess the landscape in order to understand the culture and what is expected of you - naturally, being social creatures and also wanting to "make a living" you will look to adapt. Look, if the ethos of the place is that Russia is evil regardless of whatever and this is a socially desirable position to take, then of course, this is the line you'll peddle because the whole culture is encouraging this and in fact will reward it. The ones who fail at peddling this you'll never hear of them because they'll never get to a position to reach you.

I think in the end these people make the sacrifice we were all asked to make for the covid vaccine (a lie). They are asked to surrender who they are for something else (the lie), it's mandated in the sense that if they don't they won't be able to hold that job at the BBC, CNN, NBC, The Times etc. And the same way people will take the jab to keep a job to feed their family is the same way people will peddle lies to keep a job to feed their family...

I personally learnt something crucial with the whole pandemic thing - I saw many good people that I looked up to take the jab when they had not exhausted their options and it always came down to this is the easiest thing to do really given the situation and they weren't doing it for themselves, but for others. To me it was the biggest signal I have ever seen that explains why the world is a messed up place - there's very little you can't make people do if you apply pressure on certain points. I mistakenly used to think there are certain lines "good" people would never cross and it would be nothing short of war if you dared asked them to cross those lines. Having said this, the whole thing showed there are people out there who are crazy enough never to cross certain lines and I suppose the same would apply to a minority of journalists.

 

[Hi_Henry]

Editorial Boards and the owners decide what is and isn't going to be reported. For the run of the mill journalists it is not easy to follow in the steps of Bill Maher for instance as one false move and you are gone. Maher is in the big league and can withstand getting hit on the head at times.

ABC had been expected to make changes to its late-night programming, with ''Politically Incorrect'' seen as particularly vulnerable to cancellation. The show's host, Bill Maher, had alienated some advertisers, ABC executives and even the White House press secretary, Ari Fleischer, with a comment he made soon after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11.

Living up to his show's title, Mr. Maher took issue with characterizations of the hijackers as cowards, arguing that ''we have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away.''

ABC to End 'Politically Incorrect' (Published 2002)

ABC will announce that Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher, its late-night comedy-discussion program, will go off air in January and be replaced by show starring comedian Jimmy Kimmel (M)

www.nytimes.com

He's still around.

 

[Alejo]

I always hated saying the word "boss" it was something that I felt conditioned and hypnotized me mentally, it made me have short circuits as it is part of their linguistic skills to let my guard down, not to think, not to criticize and not to exercise my right to defend myself when necessary because being "boss" means "someone who knows everything and is right about everything" and seeing that people blindly followed a person who was an example of the worst version of the human being, definitely nothing good can come out of that as an example. Especially if employees tend to see them emotionally very close and that is alarming, there is something else on an emotional level that compounds the acceptance of something that they would surely not want even within their own families if they retained their ability to think in the right way and not spend all their time looking to fill the emotional void in their lives.

Yes, I can say that I myself have always had a bit of a rebellious part in me.

And not to switch the topic of conversation too much, but that rebelliousness can be just as automatic and unconscious as blind obedience if it goes on without being questioned. There's also the value of consciously submitting yourself to the authority of someone who knows better and may be a teacher to you. I think it was Jocko Willing who said something along the lines of, sometimes for a strategic purpose, listening and obeying someone else's command is the thing to do, as this is how they will learn of your character and you'll eventually develop a voice. I found that to be rather interesting. A pay ahead kind of thing.

Though I suppose this is another topic of conversation entirely and may belong elsewhere, I just figured I would share.

 

[Alma.Innovadora]

There's also the value of consciously submitting yourself to the authority of someone who knows better and may be a teacher to you. I think it was Jocko Willing who said something along the lines of, sometimes for a strategic purpose, listening and obeying someone else's command is the thing to do, as this is how they will learn of your character and you'll eventually develop a voice. I found that to be rather interesting. A pay ahead kind of thing.

Exactly! you have nuanced my experience without commenting very well. In fact in the first job I had and the first person in the position of boss I worked with, he was a great teacher for me. He was also German, an atypical German. A micro strange universe of intense short learning that prepared me for everything that was to come.

I don't know if the correct term is rebellion, mostly it was just drawing healthy boundaries and not allowing anyone to abuse anyone for taking advantage of their position and that requires a minimum of intelligence and self-control to not end up being a foolish rebel without a cause to demand something as simple as respect to be respected, communicate and not yell, do not raise your voice to be heard, etc. Basic values that people forget, there is a limit to everything. Make clear the red lines (laughs).

 

[NewEngland Seeker]

According to a new study, journalists exhibit below-average ability to regulate their emotions, suppress biases, solve complex problems, switch between tasks, and show creative and flexible thinking.

On top of that they also award-winning journalist!

 

[Alejo]

On top of that they also award-winning journalist!

Are these awards granted by other journalists? I wonder... :P

 

[Metrist]

I was watching YouTube's, and came across this one about journalists being shot at by Russians - supposedly.

I guess journalists think they can traipse around a battlefield, gathering Intel, scouting, 'informing the people' in the middle of fighting, and they can shout: 'journalisto!' and like a magic spell they would be welcomed wherever they choose to go.

Anyway, it seemed intense with a lot of close shots. And I don't know if it was staged... But I'm sure if the shooters wanted, they could have killed them - being out in the open as they were.

Journalist on a battlefield is like a abuse of privileges, and shows how dumb and idiotic they can be in the circumstances.... 'Journalisto!' 'Are you not hearing me? Journalisto!'

 

[Brewer]

If you needed extra proof of the deliquescence of mainstream media. According to a new study, journalists exhibit below-average ability to regulate their emotions, suppress biases, solve complex problems, switch between tasks, and show creative and flexible thinking.

The paper attribute these poor scores to excessive consumption of caffeine and alcohol, but I'm wondering if something more fundamental at work.

Journalists drink too much, are bad at managing emotions, and operate at a lower level than average, according to a new study

In my limited personal experience with journalists I fully agree but what about the boss?

In the mid 80's one of my friends manned the printing presses for Murdoch's Newscorp in Sydney. He and his workmates described Rupert as a nice bloke. He'd help out loyal workers, from the janitor to the editor if they had problems. The goldbricks, slackers and bullshit artists were edged to the background. The quiet industrious types were recognized with bonuses and promotions.

Moving along to 2018. My friend's daughter, 20something product of your standard western university education is an intern for Newscorp. Took the job for her career and would rather be somewhere else. Rupert walks in one day and asks for a private chat, 45 minutes later she is completely charmed and wouldn't say a bad word against him.

Also in 2018 I'm at an ambulance call to a chronically ill man. The ambulance is delayed so after making him comfortable I had a long chat with his wife. She was Rupert's personal assistant for 15 years, mostly before the advent of the internet. Long story short, he was the best boss ever and he still called to enquire about her and her husband's well being, he still helped out when he didn't have to.

During the Wapping Dispute in 1986 she said Rupert would don overalls and man the printing presses, clean toilets, prepare food, everything. He worked shoulder to shoulder with everyone, all pitched in no matter what your station in the company. If you were afraid of getting your hands dirty, there's the door.

I asked 'but the "journalism", the gutter press?' She said, 'I know, it was terrible but he gives the people what they want, the Bread and Circuses and he's good at it'

It's a complicated world.

 

[Ricardo]

" Journalists exhibit below-average ability to regulate their emotions, suppress biases, solve complex problems, switch between tasks, and show creative and flexible thinking. "

Would this be related to what the transcripts say, vis-a-vis the military ? (as in ) external people ? after all what better way to control centralized mass propaganda means ? most formal "government(s)" seem to be as much anyways.